{"id":29595,"date":"2013-11-25T05:46:24","date_gmt":"2013-11-25T05:46:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/zenpundit.com\/?p=29595"},"modified":"2014-03-19T06:06:24","modified_gmt":"2014-03-19T06:06:24","slug":"recommended-reading-viewing-15","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/?p=29595","title":{"rendered":"Recommended Reading & Viewing"},"content":{"rendered":"

[by Mark Safranski<\/strong>, a.k.a. “zen<\/strong>“]<\/p>\n

Top Billing!<\/strong> TechCrunch – Geeks for Monarchy: The Rise of the Neoreactionaries<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

I found this one fascinating and entertaining on several level: an orthodox PC liberal doing a sort of anthropological drive by on an obscure ideological sect where the Far Right intersected with Silicon Valley, but rejected the libertarian adherence to classical liberalism for a mystical-mythologizing ethos ( they seem to admire<\/a> the mid 20th C. mummery of Julius Evola)<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

….Perhaps the one thing uniting all neoreactionaries is a critique of modernity that centers on opposition to democracy in all its forms. Many are former libertarians who decided that freedom and democracy were incompatible.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cDemotist systems, that is, systems ruled by the \u2018People,\u2019 such as Democracy and Communism, are predictably less financially stable than aristocratic systems,\u201dAnissimov writes<\/a>. \u201cOn average, they undergo more recessions and hold more debt. They are more susceptible to market crashes. They waste more resources. Each dollar goes further towards improving standard of living for the average person in an aristocratic system than in a Democratic one.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

Exactly what sort of monarchy they\u2019d prefer varies. Some want something closer to theocracy, while Yarvin proposes turning nation states into corporations with the king as chief executive officer and the aristocracy as shareholders.<\/strong><\/p>\n

For Yarvin, stability and order trump all. But critics like Scott Alexander think neoreactionaries overestimate the stability of monarchies \u2014 to put it mildly. Alexander recently\u00a0published an anti-reactionary FAQ<\/a>, a massive document examining and refuting the claims of neoreactionaries.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cTo an observer from the medieval or Renaissance world of monarchies and empires, the stability of democracies would seem utterly supernatural,\u201d he wrote. \u201cImagine telling Queen Elizabeth I \u2013 whom as we saw above suffered six rebellions just in her family\u2019s two generations of rule up to that point \u2013 that Britain has been three hundred years without a non-colonial-related civil war. She would think either that you were putting her on, or that God Himself had sent a host of angels to personally maintain order.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

T. Greer – Another Look at ‘The Rise of the West’ – But With Better Numbers<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Why the West? I do not think there is any other historicalcontroversy\u00a0that<\/a>\u00a0has<\/a>\u00a0so<\/a>\u00a0enthralled<\/a>\u00a0the<\/a>\u00a0public<\/a>intellectuals<\/a>\u00a0of<\/a>\u00a0our<\/a>\u00a0age<\/a>.\u00a0 The popularity of the question can probably be traced to Western unease with a rising China and the ease with which the issue can be used as proxy war for the much larger contest between Western liberals who embrace multiculturalism and conservatives who champion the West’s ‘unique’ heritage.\u00a0<\/strong>
\nA few months ago\u00a0I suggested<\/a>\u00a0that many of these debates that surround the “Great Divergence” are\u00a0based on a flawed premise–or rather, a flawed question. As I wrote:\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

“Rather than focus on why Europe diverged from the rest in 1800\u00a0we should be asking why the North Sea diverged from the rest in 1000.”\u00a0[1]
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

I made this judgement based off of data from\u00a0Angus Maddison<\/a>‘s\u00a0Contours of the World Economy, 1-2030 AD<\/a><\/em>and the subsequent updates to Mr. Maddison’s data set by the scholars who contribute to the\u00a0Maddison Project<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

As far as 1,000 year economic projections go this data was pretty good. But it was not perfect. In many cases–especially with the Chinese data–it was simply based on estimates and extrapolations from other eras. A more accurate view of the past would require further research.<\/strong><\/p>\n

That research has now been done.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Small Wars Journal<\/strong><\/em>– ( Sullivan<\/strong> and Elkus<\/strong>)\u00a0The \u2018New\u2019 Playbook? Urban Siege in Nairobi<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Urban siege entails combined arms, \u2018swarming\u2019 attacks that bring multiple assault squads into play to attack a target or targets.\u00a0 The goal is to draw in defenders to prolong the attack and maximize casualties and disruption.\u00a0 By leveraging multiple, simultaneous assaults (known as swarming) response is complex. As a result, fog, friction, and the smog of terrorism is amplified. As the\u00a0START Background Report<\/a>on the attack noted, extended hostage-barricade attacks with durations over 24 hours are nearly five times as lethal as those that end within a day.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The most notable antecedent to the Westgate siege was the Mumbai attack. In that 2008 action Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) conducted a series of assaults\u2014including complex hostage barricade situations\u2014on seven separate targets in Mumbai, killing 171 and wounding over 250 during their three-day siege.\u00a0 We viewed that as a seminal event in contemporary urban siege.\u00a0 Indeed in\u00a0our paper<\/a>\u00a0\u201cPostcard From Mumbai: Modern Urban Siege\u201d we called it a \u2018Back to the Future\u2019 incident where terrorists returned to urban guerilla tactics.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

War on the Rocks (Evans) –WHAT\u2019S THE DEAL WITH CHINA\u2019S NEW AIR DEFENSE IDENTIFICATION ZONE?<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

According to a spokesman for the PLA<\/a>, the zone \u201cis an area of air space established by a coastal state beyond its territorial airspace to timely identify, monitor, control and react to aircraft entering this zone with potential air threats. It allows early-warning time and provides air security.\u201d It has issued\u00a0a set of rules<\/a>\u00a0for aircraft to follow, including identification of themselves and their flight path. \u00a0Ominously, the PRC\u00a0states<\/a>, \u201cChina\u2019s armed forces will adopt defensive emergency measures to respond to aircraft that do not cooperate in the identification or refuse to follow the instructions.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

China claims the zone \u201cis not directed against any specific country or target,\u201d but this is clearly not the case. \u00a0The zone covers territory claimed by both Japan and China \u2013\u00a0the Senkaku Islands<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 and there have been a series of incidents and disputes related to this territory. \u00a0China claims to be \u201cfollowing international practice\u201d but it is not clear what practice they are referring to. They claim it is \u201ca necessary measure taken by China in exercising its self-defense right. It is not directed against any specific country or target. It does not affect the freedom of over-flight in the related airspace.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Business Insider<\/em> –US NAVY: Hackers ‘Jumping The Air Gap’ Would ‘Disrupt The World Balance Of Power’<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Chicago Boyz –Daniel Hannan\u2019s new book: Inventing Freedom: How the English-Speaking Peoples Made the Modern World<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

The National Interest<\/em> – Interpreting the new Iran Deal\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Shloky.com – Announcing the Origins of the Lean Start Up<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

The National Interest<\/em> –<\/strong> Interpreting the new Iran Deal<\/a><\/p>\n

Recommended Viewing:<\/strong><\/p>\n

J.M. Berger<\/a><\/strong> being interviewed on his book Jihad Joe<\/a><\/strong>:<\/p>\n